Who filed the complaint that caused the arrest? The school did. Are the police to ignore the complaint?

I suggest everyone read the linked news story. Here is a part of it.

Quote:

“Tim” is being treated for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and his therapist told him to draw pictures when got upset, rather than disrupt the class. So that’s what he did.

Last October, he drew stick figures of himself with a gun, pointed at four other stick figures with the words “teacher must die.” He felt calmer and was throwing the picture away when the teacher saw it and sent him to the principal’s office.

I guess instincts and common sense should dictate ignoring "teacher must die". Tell the school that. Their instincts and common sense said otherwise. They filed the complaint.

Or maybe it was the teacher who was the target of the drawing... Is he/she just a 'poor scared teacher'?..

[Edited to clarify sarcasm re: teacher]

__________________Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

(although I still don't see the correlation between instincts and commonsense and DUI checkpoints) where instincts weren't applied.

Well, I can only ask you to take a look at those videos and read my examples again. I am not even in law enforcement, but those are quite obvious to me. If you don't agree with those, it is not likely you'd agree with other types (outside checkpoints) of 4th amendment issues I have already posted in this forum.

I also would not call checkpoints a narrow issue, especially when its involvement include a wide variety of groups: DHS, local and county law enforcement in 39 states, MADD, Department of Transportation, etc. The Supreme Court has basically declared 100 miles in the US border a constitution free zone for internal border patrol checkpoints. That is no narrow strip of land.

Tell the school that. Their instincts and common sense said otherwise. They filed the complaint.

Yeah, the instincts of the school were so good that they sent the kid back to his class and just let him go home that day. The common sense of the police was so good that they went to the kid’s house that night for an arrest, complete with fingerprinting and time behind bars. Maybe his cellmate was that New Jersey 7 year old with his assault nerf gun.

Or maybe it was the teacher who was the target of the drawing... Poor scared teacher...

No, it can't be both. Silence is a legal right and obstruction is a crime. Its one or the other.

False dilemma. And maybe you mistook my use of "obstruction". I used it in the common manner, not the criminal one.

Q: Are there people who advocate or practice not ever talking to police under any circumstances?
A: Yes.

Suppose police ask them about something for the public good, in no way intended or able to incriminate them, and they spout the "Am I being detained/talk to my lawyer" line. Might a reasonable person class that as obstructionist behavior, fueled by anti-authority views, maybe rationalized as exercise of rights? I say yes, and I'll bet reasonable people agree. Let's experiment:

Me: Excuse me, Mr. WC....I'm looking for a missing child. She's not dressed for the weather and needs her insulin.

You (remember, you aren't guilty of anything): I have nothing to say about that. Contact my attorney if you want any information. Am I being detained?

Do you really see that as a plucky Everyman hero, engaged in the noble exercise of his rights? Or do you see a jerk?

__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle

Well, I can only ask you to take a look at those videos and read my examples again. I am not even in law enforcement, but those are quite obvious to me.

Have you ever sat down with people in law enforcement and discussed those examples?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

If you don't agree with those, it is not likely you'd agree with other types (outside checkpoints) of 4th amendment issues I have already posted in this forum.

Why do you say it's not likely I'll agree that there may be 4th Amendment issues in other aspects of enforcing the laws of the land?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

I also would not call checkpoints a narrow issue, especially when its involvement include a wide variety of groups: DHS, local and county law enforcement in 39 states, MADD, Department of Transportation, etc. The Supreme Court has basically declared 100 miles in the US border a constitution free zone for internal border patrol checkpoints. That is no narrow strip of land.

Check points are a larger part of law enforcement in some regions based on problems unique to that piece of geographic area. It becomes a larger part of the policing effort in other areas based on time of year.

When has MADD set up checkpoints? And, I didn't realize DOT had police powers to enforce state laws.

__________________Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

Yeah, the instincts of the school were so good that they sent the kid back to his class and just let him go home that day. The common sense of the police was so good that they went to the kid’s house that night for an arrest, complete with fingerprinting and time behind bars. Maybe his cellmate was that New Jersey 7 year old with his assault nerf gun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

Oh, the target, huh? Hope that teacher was wearing a diaper.

I don't believe any of us have all the facts surrounding this. That should make it sorta hard to draw reasonable conclusions about the actions of the school and police.

An interesting fact is the incident occurred last October, yet the report is dated February 22, 2011. Was there a news article in October?

__________________Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

Have you ever sat down with people in law enforcement and discussed those examples?

Yes, read post #39.

Why do you say it's not likely I'll agree that there may be 4th Amendment issues in other aspects of enforcing the laws of the land?

You'll have to tell me. I am basing that on your reaction to my examples in post #39. You made the comment that nothing went wrong in any of those examples.You seem to think that it's okay for a border patrol agent to consider motorist Terry Bressi and then ask his fellow agents, "What do you usually do, just **** with him?" You seem to think it's okay for BP to lie (first video) and then call the motorist's CO and CID.

Check points are a larger part of law enforcement in some regions based on problems unique to that piece of geographic area. It becomes a larger part of the policing effort in other areas based on time of year.

Washington State just defeated a bill that proposed checkpoints in that state. The bill did not even get a reading on the floor. Texas is currently considering a bill, but those proposals have gone down to defeat every single year since 2003.

I have gathered evidence for the past three years showing checkpoints do not work, either as a deterrent or for arresting drunks. I'll post this evidence if you are going to read it. You did not seem to bother much with my other examples, so you tell me if you will consider it.

When has MADD set up checkpoints? And, I didn't realize DOT had police powers to enforce state laws.

MADD aggressively pushes for checkpoints legislation in the 11 states that prohibit them. The Department of Transportation gives money to states and localities that perform checkpoints.

Lets be honest here. Terry Bressi and the border patrol (regardless of who is right and who is wrong) are in what used to be called a pissing match.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a pissing contest as "a competition to see who can urinate the farthest or highest" and (in extended use) as "any contest which is futile or purposeless especially ones pursued in a conspicuously aggressive manner."

When pissing matches start, they don't end easily.

-Dana

__________________
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
Is there something you need from me
Are you having your fun
I never agreed to be
Your holy one

My interaction with the CBP agents is always quite pleasant. The "agent" asks be to put my passport on a scanner, put my finger on the glass to make sure I am who I say I am and in 30 seconds I am on my way. The border agent Kiosk always even welcomes me to the USA.

Back when I had to take the human CBP agent, I came into the country over my limit on alcohol. The agent asked me what I had. I said 5 liters of wine. He said only 3 were allowed duty free. I offered to pay the import duty and he said to continue on and didnt want to collect the tax but thanks for declaring the taxable items.

Sometimes, I have figured out in life if you are an *****hat to people, they will be *****hats right back. If you treat them nicely, they often are more willing to help out.

I bet that if Terri would have made a good impression on them and he saw the agents every day, they would wave him through since they obviosuly recognize people. But what do I know?

-Dana

__________________
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
Is there something you need from me
Are you having your fun
I never agreed to be
Your holy one

The "agent" asks be to put my passport on a scanner, put my finger on the glass to make sure I am who I say I am and in 30 seconds I am on my way. The border agent Kiosk always even welcomes me to the USA.

We are talking about internal border patrol checkpoints. The examples I present never involve crossing an international border. You can encounter one of these checkpoints up to 100 miles inside the US border.

Lets be honest here. Terry Bressi and the border patrol (regardless of who is right and who is wrong) are in what used to be called a pissing match.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a pissing contest as "a competition to see who can urinate the farthest or highest" and (in extended use) as "any contest which is futile or purposeless especially ones pursued in a conspicuously aggressive manner."

When pissing matches start, they don't end easily.

-Dana

Terry is simply traveling back and forth to work. He is not crossing an international border. The camera is to protect himself.

No, this has not ended easily, but it will be decided by a court of law. The case is currently pending and will likely have ramifications for BP checkpoints in Maine, Washington, and other areas. It could also have an effect on local law enforcement checkpoints.

We are talking about internal border patrol checkpoints. The examples I present never involve crossing an international border. You can encounter one of these checkpoints up to 100 miles inside the US border.

I do not agree with border checkpoint not at the border. That said, the officers did not choose where to put the check points.

I also don't agree with many TSA regulations to fly.

However, that said, if you try and get into a pissing match with the cop/CBP agent/TSA agent/tax guy, they will generally oblige your request. Generally they have the upper hand.

For example, in my line of work, I have to fly lot. I have the choice if the closet homosexual wants to feel me up or not. But the choice is I don't fly. If I want a pissing match, at a minimum I don't get on the plane. That means no paycheck. So, its wise to choose pissing matches.

-Dana

__________________
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
Is there something you need from me
Are you having your fun
I never agreed to be
Your holy one

You'll have to tell me. I am basing that on your reaction to my examples in post #39. You made the comment that nothing went wrong in any of those examples.

How about quoting where I said that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

You seem to think that it's okay for a border patrol agent to consider motorist Terry Bressi and then ask his fellow agents, "What do you usually do, just **** with him?" You seem to think it's okay for BP to lie (first video) and then call the motorist's CO and CID.

Again, where did I say that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

Washington State just defeated a bill that proposed checkpoints in that state. The bill did not even get a reading on the floor. Texas is currently considering a bill, but those proposals have gone down to defeat every single year since 2003.

I have gathered evidence for the past three years showing checkpoints do not work, either as a deterrent or for arresting drunks. I'll post this evidence if you are going to read it. You did not seem to bother much with my other examples, so you tell me if you will consider it.

Your reply has no relationship to my comment. I read your other examples. I just chose to not comment on them individually. No need to post your evidence. I already believe DUI checkpoints have different results depending on time and place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorthCarolinaLiberty

MADD aggressively pushes for checkpoints legislation in the 11 states that prohibit them. The Department of Transportation gives money to states and localities that perform checkpoints.

Yep, they do that, but you lumped them in with law enforcement in your previous posts.

__________________Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

I did, and still, we don't have all the facts.
Don't you have further questions of the school administrators? How about the teacher? How about other students? How about the parents? How about relatives? How about the police officers who took the school's complaint? How about the officers dispatched to bring the boy in?

Any questions, or is the media's interpretation based on their limited facts enough?

__________________Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

I already believe DUI checkpoints have different results depending on time and place.

You believe that based on what evidence? I have never found one police report, figure, etc. that shows checkpoints apprehend more drunks than roving patrols. There is no evidence that checkpoints are a deterrent.

There is plenty of evidence showing roving patrols always work better than checkpoints. There is evidence that checkpoints are not a deterrent.

The DHS, itself, said internal border patrol checkpoints are ineffective.

IMHO "deterrence" is always hard to measure. It's the old "prove a negative" thing.

Effectiveness, or potential effectiveness, may be easier to discuss.

Myself, I've always been a fan of roving patrols, but also know that when we (MN) did sobriety checkpoints, there were people who were deterred from driving because even thought they felt they were "good drunk drivers" they didn't want to get caught in a net, despite having "no driving conduct".